Metadata

Abstract

The subject of this article is pluralism as spelled out in the social theories of John Rawls of the USA and Jean Lyotard of France. Despite their differing perspectives, these prominent social thinkers of our time share some similar views on the issue of pluralism. Both contend that contemporary societies are inherently pluralistic because they are characterized by the proliferation of incommensurable narratives/doctrines. Rawls considers pluralism as the positive outcome of the expansion of civil society; Lyotard, on the other hand, aligns pluralism with the demise of grand narratives that he believes hopelessly suffer from the problems of overextension. Moreover, both insist that it is equally wrong to assume the possibility of an overarching paradigm that acts as the politics of all and sundry. These remarks are interesting in light of the fact that Rawls and Lyotard belong to two distinct intellectual traditions. Whereas Rawls adheres to liberalism in its political form, Lyotard adopts a postmodernist stance on politics. Rawls, from a postmodern perspective, is paradigmatic of modernism in its social and political manifestations. Lyotard, in contrast, is opposed to the Enlightenment project a project at the hubs of which are the themes of synchronization and progress.